THE MAN OF THE NEW TIME

THE MAN OF THE NEW TIME

Now I will read Chapter 20 of John's Gospel.

No matter what is said to people, they have always had external beliefs about Life. We can see that even after Christ's resurrection people looked for His body in the grave. Moreover, according to the traditions at that time the body of the dead had to be smeared with some oil. The Jews, as a nation are extreme materialists, they wanted to see the body of Christ, to be sure that he was really dead and his body was buried. Contemporary people are not less materialistic than the Jews – when one of their fellow-men leaves this world, they do not cry for the actual person, but they cry for his body – that they cannot see him anymore, they cannot talk to him anymore. Translated into simpler words this means that we cry more for our clothes than for our body.

I say, when solving certain issues a man must always have in mind two important things. First, a man cannot solve the problem about Life with his heart; second, a man cannot solve this problem with his mind either – why? Because with his heart a man always becomes attached to visible things – he does not believe in what he does not see. With his mind, a man is always attached to the form of things. In this respect, there is always a kind of competition between the heart and the mind. The word ‘form’ has the implication of something established, having definite borders and frames. We can often hear people judging someone, expressing opinions about the moral, the characters, and so on; on what basis does this happen? It happens on the grounds of certain norms and rules, for which people have a definite form. For example, many people consider that a good man is the one who receives people at home in a generous manner, offers them rich meals, talks to them in a pleasant and friendly manner. If the person does not do that, if he does not receive them in that way, this means that he is not a good man.

I am asking, what is the morality of the good man? Imagine that a person joins a society of good people; one day these people start on a trip and he wants to go with them. However, it turns out that one of the man's legs is broken and he cannot walk in the mountain. What should these people do? They will climb up the mountain and he will remain at home, because he cannot walk with them. Despite their good desire for him to be together with them, they cannot take him – the conditions for climbing up the mountain determine that only a man with strong legs can climb up and reach the mountain top. In this case, should the people be regarded as bad? Imagine another situation: the man has strong legs, but he has been late a little, he has started about five hundred – one thousand paces behind the big group, so that they are already on their way down the mountain and he is still climbing up. Should this man get angry and name these people bad just because they have not waited for him? Moreover, they did not even suspect that he was walking behind in order to wait for him. What will he gain if he climbs up the mountain together with them? Now, imagine that the man is invited to a wealthy feast, but his stomach is upset; he goes to the event but he cannot eat; he just watches – everyone eats cheerfully, in good spirits, and he cannot taste even a bite. Who is to be blamed for that? People have invited him, they have served him food as for everybody else, but he himself abstains from eating. How does he benefit from the feast and the invitation of these good people? There is something else that can happen: the man is invited to a feast, his stomach is well, but he arrives five minutes later than the other people – all the guests are already eating. He also takes a seat and starts eating. His stomach is healthy – he falls a little behind the others but he finds the food tasty, he is satisfied with the food; he will catch up with the others, he is calm, does not hurry, does not worry. Does he lose anything because he is not together with all the rest? Therefore, the man must understand the sense, the spirit of things.

So, first is the one, who can adopt the Truth and apply it; last is the one who cannot adopt the Truth – if he cannot adopt it, he would not be able to apply it. Someone says, „I was first to have reached such and such a place, I was first to have read the Gospel, I was first to have listened to such and such a speech, and so on.” First is not the one who has done something in time and space, but the one who has applied it – such a man knows if he is the first or not. Should he ask the others if he applies the truth in his life? It is funny if a man who has had a good meal asks other people if he has had a good meal or not – he knows that, he is the master of the situation.

When talking about Good, Goodness, we have to consider the following law: The Good always comes after Love. This means that if a man does not love you, he cannot be good to you; if he loves you, he will surely be good to you. Somebody says, „I am a good man.” If you love, only then can you be good. The fruit cannot come first before the tree, and the tree is the fruit of Love. Therefore, you cannot expect a fruit before Love has come. When Love comes, then the fruit will appear.

Continue to read:
http://www.clubconspiracy.com/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=6254&forum=23&PHPSESSID=3d41ae3236cf01287ca09f7cd0a5e472